by:Muhammad Fakhryrozi.My current company has served one of a province level government institution named BAPEDA (Local Development Body) of West Java. At the end of 2011 we conducted a research on their private stakeholder’s insight. We explored how they perceived BAPEDA of West Java, what their expectation toward BAPEDA service especially which related to CSR activities, what obstacles that they want BAPEDA to overcome, what negative things that bothered them, how is their experience when coordinating with BAPEDA and so on.
This qualitative research which conducted by an in depth interview with some private companies decision maker both national and multinational revealed an expected findings. We had expected that the respondents would tell something like corruption, briberies, bureaucratic and long time process and other common weaknesses that attached to Indonesia’s government institution. They were also had known that those things would revealed in the research findings.
Although there were many common things that revealed, there were also other things that could be a valuable input for the institution. From the research we found some feedbacks that told in details. We also gained experiences that also told in details. From those findings we got a valuable insights on this intitution’s coordination in terms of it’s process. We knew at what stage that the bottleneck occured, at what activities that the improvement urgently required. We could map the improvement areas. The next stage of the research were a strategic discussion with our expert. And i think this is the very important part, because this is “the what next” after knowing the data. We also developed some framework for the discussion and we hope they gained a beneficial output from our work.
I think their eager to hear their stakeholders, to understand their needs and wants, their anxieties and desires is something that has to be much appreciated. Other government institutions have to look at their stakeholders as a source of valuable input. This will lead them to be more customer-centric and as a result they will be able to deliver an excellent service.
It’s good for them to design such a systematic research that can describe their process in details. This is really meaningful for them in order to build their service blueprint. Service blueprint describes a comprehensive coordination from back office to front office in dealing with serving stakeholders. Customer’s moment of truth just like in private business is also matters in service blueprinting. Customer’s moment of truth is the interaction of stakeholders with organization’s touch points. The whole touch points should be able to satisfy the stakeholders. This will lead to better customer experience. Having a detail service blueprint, government institution can conduct an effective research that can be an input to improve certain area in the blueprint.
The next thing that can be done is to conduct innovation strategy. A government not only can provide the input to improve certain area but also to create an innovation. By doing innovation they can ease their customer’s process, cut off the bureacratic process, cheaper cost for customer, create more customer experience, thus create more value for their customers/stakeholders. This thing start with being more customer-centric by gathering an insight from stakeholders.
Customer-centricity is a paradigm. This should embedded in the whole levels and units of government body. Customer-centicity also means better customer insight. Qualitative research can provide a better and depth insight then ordinary quantitative survey. I think qualitative methods such focus group discussion and in-depth interview will be very beneficial. Quantitative survey can be conducted in order to support the qualitative. Moreover an etnographic research is also can be chosen if it is necessary.